Guest guest Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 > > A mystical experience has to be experienced by something separate from > that experience....It has to be stored within the memory of a psycho-soma. > > " All there is is consciousness " comes up over and over in mystical > literature. > > Actually it is a meaningless concept. > > If everything is one thing.....nothing could exist. > > The phrase is a conceptual pointing. > > It is futile to search within the conceptual overlay for the source of > that overlay. > > Even the word " consciousness " is part of the overlay and therefore > meaningless. > > There a consciousnesing out of which the world dream emerges......but > it can only see its products.......It can never see itself......... > > > It is what's seeing. > > > > Ain't that a kick in the ass? > > > > > toombaru > There is another perspective here, toombaru. I agree that a description of a mystical experience is something of an oxymoron... indeed, the term " nondual experience " is an oxymoron as I see it. Even " bliss " is not legitimately nondual in my view. To experience bliss is to be invested in a perspective of false-self. That being said, however, there can be writing that arises that needn't be attributed to a particular subject or even point-of-view. Some of what is called mystical writing *could be* such. In such writing there may be subjects and objects in the language itself, but that can not be taken to evidence a dualist thought process behind the writing. Given the above, an expression such as " all is consciousness " could conceivably arise without it being an expression/ desription of an experience by an experiencer. Indeed, I believe one can find such statements made by Nisargadatta. Statements such as " all is consciousness " coming from one such as Nisargadatta should not be taken as absolute statements of what-is-the-case in my view. Whatever he said was always to a particular person or persons, and was uttered as a teaching tool for consideration in that particular context. It seems rather dubious that there could ever be any absolute true statements anyway. Afterall, aren't we just massaging each other's brains with these utterances we pass back and forth? Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 9, 2007 Report Share Posted June 9, 2007 > > A mystical experience has to be experienced by something separate from > > that experience....It has to be stored within the memory of a > psycho-soma. > > > > " All there is is consciousness " comes up over and over in mystical > > literature. > > > > Actually it is a meaningless concept. > > > > If everything is one thing.....nothing could exist. > > > > The phrase is a conceptual pointing. > > > > It is futile to search within the conceptual overlay for the source of > > that overlay. > > > > Even the word " consciousness " is part of the overlay and therefore > > meaningless. > > > > There a consciousnesing out of which the world dream emerges......but > > it can only see its products.......It can never see itself......... > > > > > > It is what's seeing. > > > > > > > > Ain't that a kick in the ass? > > > > > > > > > > toombaru > > > > There is another perspective here, toombaru. > > I agree that a description of a mystical experience is > something of an oxymoron... indeed, the term > " nondual experience " is an oxymoron as I see it. Even > " bliss " is not legitimately nondual in my view. > To experience bliss is to be invested in a perspective > of false-self. > > That being said, however, there can be writing that > arises that needn't be attributed to a particular > subject or even point-of-view. Some of what is called > mystical writing *could be* such. In such writing > there may be subjects and objects in the language itself, > but that can not be taken to evidence a dualist > thought process behind the writing. > > Given the above, an expression such as " all is consciousness " > could conceivably arise without it being an expression/ > desription of an experience by an experiencer. > > Indeed, I believe one can find such statements made by > Nisargadatta. > > Statements such as " all is consciousness " coming from > one such as Nisargadatta should not be taken as absolute > statements of what-is-the-case in my view. Whatever he > said was always to a particular person or persons, and > was uttered as a teaching tool for consideration in that > particular context. > > It seems rather dubious that there could ever be any > absolute true statements anyway. Afterall, aren't we > just massaging each other's brains with these utterances > we pass back and forth? ha ha ha ahahhahaha ahhh hahahaha! ..b b.b. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.